Every 5 years our democratic system gives the citizens the right to elect 87 men and women to run the country and indirectly our lives. And by the rule of a simple majority, all it needs is 44 men to be elected from one party to form the ruling govt. In a normal democratic system they will manage the country under some platforms and ideas they sold to the electorate and are expected to work within those ideas and policies during their term in office. Varying from those consented ideas will be a violation of trust. Running away with new ideas that were not agreeable during the election promises would be a breach of faith and the people’s consent be sought again.
A mature democracy would have its checks and balance to ensure that the ruling govt does not get carried away with what they want to do and think that they can commit murders with total disregard to the views of the people. In an immature state, where the people are ignorant, depoliticised, fear of the govt and did not know their right to change govt, many trespasses, abuses and unilateral decision making in direct conflict with the wants of the people are often shafted down the people’s throats at will.
Are we still in such a state of immaturity or have we grown up as a well educated, informed and politicised people, aware of our rights as citizens, the OB markers that the govt must respect, and our right to shape our lives and the future of our nation? Or are the people still as naïve, apolitical, disenfranchised, to surrender all their rights to an elected govt of 44 men to do as they pleased with their lives and country?
In an era of ignorance and illiteracy, the people may by default allow the elite to rule them on the assumption that they know better. And sometimes the elite may get deluded or delude the people into believing that they are demi gods or immortals, and they are the best to drive their lives and country forward. I believe as a people calling ourselves first world, with many highly educated and qualified, such myths will long be thrown into the longkangs. The people are now as knowledgeable and well informed as the ruling elite, and have a mind of their own to know or to question what they want in their lives and where the country shall be heading. There is really little between the ruling elite and the people at large in terms of intellect and wisdom.
Assuming the latter is where we are today, should the people continue to dismissively take the edicts of the elite and let the elite rule them, interfere with their lives and take the country to wherever they want?
Do we want to have a 6m population or more, ever increasing housing prices, unable to own private cars unless paying with an arm or a leg, that we should be content to live in smaller and smaller high rise flats, lesser breathing and leisure space, to go around in public transports that the people have little control of and often at the mercy of operators’ interests and whims and fancies and with little privacy or privacy violated by the ill mannered and uncouth?
Would it be time that the people tell the 44 elected representatives that they are there, given the chance to run the country, only with the consent of the people, and if they failed or are not up to it in their jobs, they will be summarily removed by the people? Is it time the people take control of their country, decide where it wants it to go, and be in charge and not be ruled by 44 people who were only to do a job with their approval and not to think they can do anything they want without the people’s agreement, that they own the country, the people and the people’s life and wealth?
Isn’t it silly for 3m people to succumb to 44 men and women elected by them to do as they please and with the people only at best, crying out loud but helpless to do anything about it? Who owns this country and who should decide how the people are to live their own lives?
Bravo, bravo, bravo, Mr. RB.
ReplyDeleteI could not have put it better.
The People Get The Government They Deserve
ReplyDeletei.e. it doesn't matter whether it is democracy or theocracy or mother-father-cracy...ultimately it is THE CULTURE which determines the destiny of the cuntree and its sheeple.
Which is why I DON'T VOTE, and try to discourage others from voting. There is no point -- you may think you are making a difference, but you are not.
Human beings are "confirming machines" -- we seek to confirm our beliefs, no matter what. If the outcome of the ballot is in our favour, we "confirm" by saying our vote made a difference. [Logical fallacy: Confirmation Bias]
If our side loses and the other party wins, we blame the other voters for being "stupid and gullible", or the other party from resorting to "dirty tricks and electoral corruption". [Logical fallacy: Third Person Bias]
redbean, it appears to be, is a classic "victim" of these kinds of cognitive biases.
Faith -- the basis, the bedrock for BELIEF -- is definitely more powerful than reason because faith is based on pure EMOTION.
Culture takes a long time to change. Basically, people won't change their beliefs. The more evidence to the contrary you present, the more "logically" you argue, the more they will DIG IN on their beliefs, close ranks and become more stubborn and unswerving.
Essentially the way culture changes is when the stalwarts or "hubs" of closely held beliefs/ bad ideas die out.
My generation -- the baby boomers (the people I quarrel the most with -- fucking idiots, many of them)-- are full of unswerving dickheads who cling to old, shattered beliefs and refuse to examine the new data which presents itself everyday.
The backfire Effect
ReplyDeleteThe more confirming evidence presented, the more the unconvinced dig in and anchor themselves to their (busted) mythical beliefs.
In the political realm: the die-die vote PAP, will die-die vote PAP no matter what, and the die-die vote opposition will die-die vote opposition...purely emotionally and not rationally.
Basically you are then back to square one -- you vote is completely WORTHLESS -- ultimately it is the culture which determines the political party.
Also, consider the irrefutable fact: No matter who wins the election, The Government ALWAYS gets in!
More on the Backfire Effect.
RB, you surprise me sometimes. Anyone who is honest and intelligent enough will sense that something is amiss with the electoral system.
ReplyDeleteIn today's ST commentary, the writer highlighted Najib's popularity with voters but not his government.
Voters are like plasticine in the hands of political players. In the current political setting, the nation and the people are easily manipulated by a few powerful ' good men'.
But should these few men decide the entire course of the nation and even the world?
It is like asking the lions to rule the animal kingdom and do you seriously think nature will accede to that?
There is an imbalance of power as the result of our current political structure. Only the cross can address the imbalance of powers.
ReplyDeleteAnd nothing to do with rubbish religious theocracy.
Mind you, some of the 44 men could be kids just fucking around. Some have private agenda that could scare the daylight out of you if you know what they really are. Some have questionable loyalties or existence here.
ReplyDeleteAre there really any thinkers who are seriously wanting to make living more meaningful other than jokers who only know how to count the beans?
It is inevitable. Either you heed the prophecy or you continue your journey in hell.
ReplyDeleteNah, group think rules. Pay more to rid corruption. Of course with such fat paycheques, even pastors wil preach more LUSTFOOL sermons
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletere are we still in a state of immaturity --- of course we are! we cant even look after our kids and old people ourselves for a few hours one day a week!! we chuck those basic duties to others and whine when these others ask for a day's rest.
ReplyDelete" If American women would increase their voting turnout by ten percent,
ReplyDeleteI think we would see an end to all of the budget cuts in programs benefiting women and children."
Coretta Scott King
" Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom. "
Friedrich August von Hayek
"I had the good fortune to be able to right an injustice;
that I thought was being heaped on young people;
by lowering the voting age;
where you had young people that were old enough to die in Vietnam; but not old enough to vote for their members of Congress that sent them there. "
Birch Bayh
90% of the electorate has no idea to what they are voting,seriously. Yes, they voted for the bottle of honey in the basket. But they have to accept everything that comes in the basket - which includes a stack of blank cheques.
ReplyDeleteThe other 10% writes the zeros on the blank cheques.
In HK, as they look for the next strongman under beijing's thumb, the tycoons are already out to influence votes by picking a leader who would appreciate their...company.
ReplyDeleteanon Mar 17 1.11pm
ReplyDelete... There is an imbalance of power as the result of our current political structure....
More than that, imbalance of social and economical spheres too, not just political structure.
Just reading this small sample size of posts, one can get a sense of "culture" in Singapore's political realm, and it makes it easier to understand WHY the people get the government they deserve.
ReplyDelete1. 3 person fallacy/bias : "I'm alright and perfectly rational, other people are the assholes who are duped by propaganda and therefore vote wrongly".
2. The Dunning-Krueger Effect : "Although I don't know shit, I am knowledgeable when it comes to local politics"
...just to pick out a couple.
And the culture begets the type of government and the type of CHARACTERS which make up the government.
Since I don't vote, don't blame me for the shitty government you guys get, and truly deserve :-))
Therefore, I'll continue to treat Singapore as my very own private Hotel. And my right to permanent suka-suka entry and exit is my precious pink NRIC.
Fuck you all, you have no right to a cuntree because you don't deserve one ;-)
Actually I was reading some of Matilah's posts and i found his perspectives and estimations very insightful.
ReplyDeleteI have also gleaned with his helpful URL links something known as the global debt clock.
In essence, even though the wealthiest nations seem wealthy, the have huge national debts.
Pardon my interpretation of national debt as it might not be perfectly accurate.
National debt, imho, is akin to selling 500,000 public apartments all at once, charging say, 400k per home, amounting to a total of 200 Billion. Even if the government didn't have that money spontaneously, it would print the money anyway as payment, so it would settle what it needs to, debt repayment to whoever they are paying to complete those houses.
They then 'loan' this amount to the people at say, whats the current loan rate now, 2.6% i presume?
presuming half of that 200 Billion is paid up, we still have 100 billion accruing interest @ 2.6% per year.
That amounts to 2.6 Billion generated from loan interest outstanding alone. Effectively, 2.6 Billion was created out of nowhere and this increases the money supply by that amount every year. Given that new homes are built and some payments are made yet some defaulted, its safe to assume that if public debt of 100 Billion only rises, and since most loans take really long to clear (like say, 20-30 yrs) effectively, by the time 1 household fully pays up for the cost of the home, does it mean the money creation formula stops? No! it continues especially if you have more and more people or households who have taken loans and are servicing this interest on their end.
Eureka, we have ourselves an almost infinite money creation algorithim. The weird part of all this is, while the cost of this money creation is socialised in the form of 'interest rates' to the general public, the monetary mechanics and spillover benefits of it have been more or less kept mum.
It then becomes apparent that national debt doesn't have to be settled. In fact, the larger national debt is, the larger the amount of money can be generated from this idea we call interest.
If national debt jumped to 1 trillion(i.e 10x the national debt) then the rate of money creation from the national debt pegged to the interest rate is also multiplied by 10x(from 2.6 Billion to 26 Billion/year).
The reason why people are assured a rise in the value of their homes is then, not for their own good, but more a matter of a creeping inflation. Why, you might ask.
ReplyDeleteIf a home was bought with $50k 30 years ago, and now sold to someone who bought this resale flat for $500k, all other factors remaining unchanged, the home calls for $450k additional inflated cost. Even if the buyer foots 100k from CPF, the buyer still needs to loan 350k over a time period of say 30yrs @ 2.6% per annum.
Given linear loan repayment with no defaulting, its still 15 years worth of full interest. 350k generates $136.5k over this repayment period.
(And this amount is created via this technique across the board when public housing is open to market speculation, with CoVs, stamp duty, etc).
That's why they cannot be freehold but have to be 99 yrs leased to the people. If its freehold it ceases to contribute to this money creation process via interest and consequential staggering of national debt. It would take too much effort to rebuild public housing from the ground up, and a 99 yr lease would be more convenient to legislate a path for money creation out of national debt.
Bringing us back to the national debt clock, you notice how the most advanced nations are most in debt @ 30k-50k or more per person, yet what is considered to be a lesser well off nation, has very low per person debt @ 5k/3k/1k and even lower still. (per person means its averaged out, and includes the sick, dying, infants, handicapped in totality)
I could be shooting myself in the foot, but i'm betting that when an economic crisis occur, the low national debt nations will easily survive this tumultuous period. Whereas the more 'wealthy' nations have severe economic repercussions and values tank tremendously.
If we don't allow prices to stabilise and contract and truly allow demand to find supply without intervention, the natural algorithims in micro-managed capitalist nations eventually overheat any nation's economy because what we initially define to be 'wealth' is merely 'debt' socialised!
That's just a humble estimate of merely 1 avenue of 'wealth' generation. Many other avenues of 'regulations' can contribute to 'wealth' of a nation.
Yes, everyone have their own saying, regardless, life goes on, we just have to move on.
ReplyDeleteAlkaline Water Singapore
anon 901:
ReplyDeleteI'm not paid to cum up with solutions. You have very expensive elite ministers to do that. So fuck you, and your family ;-)
I write here for fun, and also as a "web log" which I can refer back to.
----
Victor:
It is only an assupmtion of mine that the S'pore's self-financed sovereign debt is financed in a large part by the evil CPF Ponzi-Tax. I have no concrete proof, so be careful on basing your arguments on my unproven premise. i.e. like myself, most people have no clue on how S'pore's finances are managed. Best we can do : GUESS.
I cannot find the proof, thanks to the Singapore state's interpretation of what "transparency" and "accountability" mean. (it means jack-shit...you get what they reveal to you, and you don't even know if what is revealed is true or bogus)
>> when an economic crisis occur, the low national debt nations will easily survive this tumultuous period. <
1. Economic crises occur quite frequently -- every few years -- due to the vast amount of accumulated debt, and debt instruments (mostly toxic). debt makes markets unstable. Why? Because of counter parties, debt being assets as well as liability -- you don;t know what the counter parties are going to do, you don't know if debtors are going to de-leverage or default....to many uncertainties, too many players ==> instability and therefore volatility. HAVE FUN speculating -- can make gazillions! ;-)
2. These days most cuntrees "survive" even the most debilitating economic crises because of the global agencies ready to bail them out and the global central banks all willing to coordinate massive "quantitative easing" aka money printing to ensure liquidity.
Everybody's printing money these days. You can count on it for years to come. Allowing toxic assets to fail en masse is completely out of the question because that is likely to lead to civil wars.
Watch China, and Tibet. The govt is playing it down, but they are in "panic" mode. Facebook Twitter and SMS are abuzz with freedom-loving Chinese people (taking the lead from the pissed-off citizens in the Middle East) trying to coordinate protests. It gets very interesting from here on out.
Hi Jean, welcome to the blog.
ReplyDeleteTake this as a sharing of ideas and views. It has an educational perspective to what were being posted here.
Oh how many of the 44 men are seriously thinking about the country's future or the people's future? And how many will be in Parliament just to debate for the sake of debating? Or to take potshot at anyone they dislike?
ReplyDeleteIF the 44 men and women dont think about the people, there is nothing to worry.
ReplyDeleteIT IS WHEN THE REST, OTHER THAN THE 44 or even 80; does not think about themselves, their futures and their succeeding generations that WILL BE DISASTROUS or even fatal.
Matilah Singapura is no problem BUT Matilah SINGAPORIAN WILL BE A CALAMITY. TRAGEDY can happen anytime.
BE AWARE OUR LIVE(Life) MAY GET WRECK ANY MOMENT IF WE ARE NOT MINDFUL.
patriot
Most of the daft have been manipulated to vote one party by the MIWs controlled MSM and with many MPs parachuted into GRCs, you know who those MPs are beholden to. So you don't need 44 of them to make or break your life.
ReplyDeleteShould it comes to the crunch, you cannot even be sure that the ministers will make decisions beneficial to the people, not when they have their loyalty bought by the $$$, a salary where some have shown that they cannot achieve when they relinquish their ministerial jobs.
Saycheese